The patent specifically refers to a gap between a front and back portion of a deck [panellization] where the front is depressed at the ckpt rear. Warren's boat uses a separate cockpit base panel and an unrelated fore and stern panellization. A totally different precondition and geometric solution.

According to my communications with Mr. Lockwood (after receiving a decidedly unfriendly letter from his lawyer), he felt that the configuration on my Petrel SG that is similar to Warren's was infringing his patent. He contended that the "deck apron" was part of the bow deck.

After exchanging a few emails showing prior art, none of which he accepted as relevant, he stopped replying to me. I have not heard from him since.